We will present the theoretical approach
to the problems of body and technology in stage performance. The
starting point will be the status of the categories such as
presence, ephemerality, immediacy of the (theatre) performance
radically undermined in the texts of performance studies
scholars such as Rebecca Schneider, Amelia Jones or Philip
Auslander. Utilizing examples of performances from young Polish
theatre:
Krzysztof Garbaczewski (b.1983) and
Radosław Rychcik (b.1981), we will juxtapose two functioning
models of body-technology relation on stage. The first one –
represented by Garbaczewski – is based on understanding the body
as always mediated. It multiplies (undermines) the body’s
presence by use of audiovisual means. The second one – Rychcik’s
case – is to push the theatrical presence of the body to the
absolute maximum. In this case an audiovisual layer is used to
build a strong opposition to the actor’s stage presence. The two
examples will be used to propose new theoretical approaches. We
would like to show that such stage phenomena are not only the
sign of a changing technological reality, but are also important
theoretical input in the understanding of theatre itself. We
will posit that every single body on stage (no matter if
consciously, as in Garbaczewski’s case, or unconsciously, as in
Rychcik’s case) is already mediated, and the use of
technological tools is a way to play with this specific aspect
of theatre’s corporeality. This broader perspective will also
incorporate elements of the political dimension of annexing
media-mediated and media-manipulated corporeality, for it will
follow the apparently transparent and natural dimension of such
actions, whereby once again, as postulated by
Jacques Rancière it will turn aesthetic considerations into
political considerations.
[suite...]

To what extent does vocal modulation both
alienate and liberate performers on the intermedial stage?
Philip Auslander and Matthew Causey, among a growing number of
contemporary theoreticians, have pointed to the « otherness »
and « uncanny » experiences of both performers and spectators
when confronted with digital doubles. How have artists working
with vocal modulation negotiated these experiences and
incorporated them into their practice? Our presentation will
juxtapose an analysis of key works by three contemporary
performance artists –
The Wooster Group’s Hamlet
,
Laurie Anderson’s O Superman
and Marie
Brassard’s Peep Show
– with a series of digital audio workshops held at the
University of Toronto to better understand how both audiences
and performers experience the disembodiment inherent in digital
voice modulation. Anderson and Brassard speak of alter-egos
or theatrical extensions of character, while Wooster Group
performers describe increasing freedom through loss of control
over technological modulations. In researching these works, we
will examine whether an artist’s experiences are at odds with
those of the spectator, who may experience a split or delayed
presence of the performer. These experiences will further be
compared to an in-house creation of
Kurt Schwitters' Ursonate. It has been described as
written in a « universal language, » and we will attempt to
stretch its universality into a digital soundscape through voice
modulation, conscious of the artist experiences described above.
Examining the psychoacoustic effects of digital modulation
techniques applied to pitch/harmonics, volume, resonance, delay,
and spatial (dis)location, we will compare experiences of
performers, designers, and spectators with the experiences
described in our case studies. Doing so will allow us to further
identify how voice modulation both alienates and liberates, and
how the actor can better situate him/herself within an
intermedial practice.[suite...]

A Dance that Draws you to the Edge of your Seat:
Acting and Disability Faced with Technology

Tony McCaffrey

“Sarah
Mainwaring's palsy turns
the task of clipping a microphone into its stand into a dance
that draws you to the edge of your seat.” This is how the
reviewer for the
Sydney
Morning Herald
described the tremulous and fragile gestures of a performer with
cerebral palsy, who laboriously, in fits and starts of movement,
sets up a microphone at the beginning of Super Discount,
(2013) by
Back
to Back Theatre , an
internationally renowned ensemble of people perceived to have
intellectual disabilities. At the conclusion of a previous
show, Food Court she delivered Caliban’s speech from
The Tempest, ‘The isle is full of noises . . .’ in a
similarly tremulous and fragile voice. As she spoke into a
microphone (itself tuned to reverberate strategically) the sound
of her voice was accompanied by the words of the speech
projected in surtitles as animated text either rushing headlong
or stalling, apparently (voice-)activated by the fits and starts
of her distinctive delivery.

The work of Back to Back Theatre Company
is, amongst many other things, an ongoing interrogation of the
interaction between technology and performance (onstage and
off). By considering the work of this company, and of
Zurich’s Theatre Hora , and
my own practical research with
Different Light Theatre ,
an ensemble of disabled performers in New Zealand, I wish to
explore the following questions: Does technology
facilitate, aestheticize or problematize an access to “voice”
for disabled performers? What place does assistive or
aestheticizing technology have in how the transmission of affect
and meaning is negotiated between disabled performer and
(supposedly able) audience? What are the political, aesthetic
and ethical implications of this interaction between the
perceived fragility of the performer and the supposed
communicative empowerment of technology? What is it about such
performance that “draws you to the edge of your seat?” [suite...]